The wait is over. Eleven days after the Congolese cast their votes in a presidential and general election, Felix Tshisekedi has been declared winner of the December 20 poll in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). His win, however, is already being contested. The result of the poll like the entire conduct of the election continues to divide opinion. Some, a, collection of democracy evangelists and those who live a life of illusion, cynics and opportunists, the gullible and manipulable, and those who play power games have hailed the polls as an exercise in democracy. Other, more objective observers, think the Congolese have just gone through a parody of an election and judge the whole exercise to be a mockery of the democratic process. As a result of which the Congolese have been dealt another cruel hand. This latter group point out that in its simplest terms democracy means the opportunity to choose between viable alternatives. It means the electorate understand what each candidate is about, what vision and plans they have for the country, and that they have the freedom and right to make that choice freely. It also means that the state has the logistics, infrastructure, other facilities, and election officials with the integrity to enable the exercise of that choice. None of these was present in the DRC elections. It is therefore safe to say that there was no credible election. But as the national election commission in the DRC announced, someone did get elected in much the same way, as he was the last time, five years ago. Only this time no one was surprised. It was expected. The last time, it was through a unique electoral theft where the government of the day rigged the vote for one of those vying for office contesting against its own candidate. This time the same candidate has state machinery at his disposal and does not need a helping hand from a rival. It is impossible to believe that the Congolese made the right or free choice. On what basis would they have done that? On his record of achievements? On a new vision that will lift the country to a position it should occupy by virtue of its immense wealth? The same man has been in power for five years with nothing to show for it, except for ethnic cleansing of his own population, growing insecurity in the east of the country, increasing intolerance of other views, and deteriorating relations with neighbours. The last time, the Congolese and others in the region and beyond gave him the benefit of the doubt. He was inexperienced but had the chance to break from the messy politics of the past and make a difference, they thought. He was relatively untainted. He had not been involved directly in the chaotic politics of the DRC. He could therefore make a fresh start and chart the right direction for the country. He stood to benefit from his father’s long involvement in Congolese politics and the extensive networks he had built in and outside the country. In addition, he had the opportunity to learn from his longer-serving peers in the region who showed him a lot of goodwill. Everyone thought that five years was a long enough period to acquire the essentials of statecraft and diplomacy. They were wrong on all counts. It turned out that inexperience was more than lack of practice or exposure. It was incompetence. He displayed an unwillingness, or perhaps it was inability, to learn. He spurned the goodwill of his neighbours in the region and instead, made attacking some of them the centre of his domestic and foreign policy. Will it be any different this time around? No one expects much change, although no one is giving up on the possibility. Tshisekedi is reported to have won with 73% of the vote. His nearest rival, Moise Katumbi, got a paltry 18%. The others shared the remainder. That should boost his confidence immensely and remove any fears of legitimacy, and make him more secure That could lead to two possible scenarios. One, an optimistic one. He will feel that he has won the election on his own terms and is not beholden to anybody for the right to govern. That would lift any constraints it may have imposed on him. He would then feel less of a prisoner, less angry, make him more predictable and therefore more likely to act in a more considered manner. Two, a less hopeful one. He could carry on as before but much worse. He could feel the removal of any constraints as licence to act without restraint, that it gives him the liberty to do as he wishes. He could become reckless and dangerous to both DRC itself and the region. Before any of this comes to pass, the fact is Tshisekedi has got another term regardless of how he may have obtained it. The Congolese and the rest of the world will have to live with that however uncomfortably. Of course, they will hope that things might get better. And maybe, just maybe, they might change. Conversion does happen and in unexpected ways and unusual circumstances. History has ample proof of that. If that were to happen, the persecuted people of the Kivu region might then be accepted as equal Congolese and not some horrible aliens to be exterminated. All Congolese might then feel less victims of nature’s gift to them and more the owners of their country and its abundance. They might stop bragging about its scandalously abundant natural wealth and begin enjoying its benefits. More wish than hope? More prayer than conviction? Perhaps. But wishes do come true and prayers get answered. And the Congolese are an eternally hopeful people. Perhaps, that is the only way to cope with the raw deal that seems to be their fate. They will still stumble along and make the best of it, and hope that things will change.
